Home
Take Action
Join Us
Issues
News
Donate Today
Videos
The Hub
More
The plans still fall short of the law’s intention to “provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps.”
Recommendation to comply with the requirement in law to include 11th grade ELA and mathematics scores from assessments administered statewide as the Academic Achievement indicator for 11th grade and high schools
The failure of the California Department of Education to address substantive, meaningful feedback is not only a missed opportunity to address persistent achievement gaps, it’s a dereliction of the duty laid out in the California Constitution
EdVoice urges the Board to direct staff to work with experts and staff to develop state guidance on establishing consistent and meaningful fiscal transparency, not to wait for non-binding guidance from the U.S. Department of Education
EdVoice strong opposition to the proposed definition of “ineffective teacher” in the revised draft of the California State Plan for ESSA. The Superintendent’s latest proposed definition is reckless and has no policy, analytical or legal basis for its support.
Unfortunately, this proposal repeats failures of the Academic Performance Index (API) scheme with an error bias greater than actual positive or negative results when focusing on status-based cross-cohort outcome comparisons.
The draft ESSA state plan, which should reflect the progress of those 2.5 years of work, fails to show the state actually intends to do anything itself to ensure extra federal resources are programmed to reduce historic inequities in access to basic public education and effective teachers.
We urge the Board to recognize that previous iterations of the Superintendent’s plan are inadequate and direct the Department to immediately engage stakeholders
Specifically, we support several provisions of the proposed regulations that are key to addressing the historic inequities of student outcomes or inattention by California’s state leaders.
The proposed regulations require transparency in all public schools by requiring states to assign a comprehensive, summative rating for each school to provide a clear picture of its overall performance that is understandable to parents and the public.
Direction must be explicit for funding. Clarification is necessary to ensure there is in fact a mechanism to verify supplement not supplant assurances at the state level and for the public.
